The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > I think it's just a bad picture
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-28-2008, 09:12 PM
radoskal's Avatar
radoskal radoskal is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 952
Default I think it's just a bad picture

look here




Now between the three of em, I gotta say. The Original is fine and upstanding, the refit (my fave) is spectacular, and the New one...well, from the picture it does in fact look like nothing to write home about.

The engine Pylons look droopy, the saucer section out of place. Yet, at the same time when I see it zooming around in the trailer, It takes on a totally new life and somehow becomes much more identifiable as a constitution class starship. It's like the motion actually breathes a bit of sparkle and life into the otherwise, saggy model, leading me to believe that we should all take a deep breath, and wait to judge the ship when we can see it, to be blunt, on a really big screen, and for more than a few frames at a time.
__________________
Mom, how many times do I have to tell you, Track is what athletes run on. Trek is what the Enterprise goes on.

-Free Enterprise
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-28-2008, 09:20 PM
Big D's Avatar
Big D Big D is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,112
Default

Apparently, there's some distortion in the dreaded 'new Enterprise pic', which is partly responsible for the engineering hull looking so bulbous and stretched, with the nacelles being so sharply tapered yet short.

The shots from the trailer, brief though may be, certainly make her look a more elegant and familiar beast. Especially the half-built pic.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-28-2008, 09:27 PM
radoskal's Avatar
radoskal radoskal is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 952
Default

agreed, the shots of the enterprise being under construction make it seem like she could easily turn out to be the TOS-1701, though I think that was kind of the point.
__________________
Mom, how many times do I have to tell you, Track is what athletes run on. Trek is what the Enterprise goes on.

-Free Enterprise
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-28-2008, 09:36 PM
MonsieurHood's Avatar
MonsieurHood MonsieurHood is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,352
Default

The TOS Connie, looks very utilitarian. It looks like an exploratory research vessel with offensive/defensive capabilities. Very trim, a very astute and very no-frills ship. The kind of ship such an organization as the Federation would send to far away places to explore, examine, research and report. A good all around vessel.
The TMP Connie, has all of that, and more. She doesn't look any more or less capable of scientific work, but she looks far more well equipped for chance encounters with known or unknown hostiles. The refit always looked like an avenging angel to me.
The Abramsprise, looks like a failed experimental craft that was too expensive to throw away, but not quite good enough for front line fleet operations. A factory second, so to speak. The feeling I get when I look at her is the same feeling I get when I see the Constellation class. A nice idea, and it looks great on paper, but when you get it put together it's kind of like that cadillac Johnny Cash sang about that he put together one piece at a time out of cars from different years, It's just strange. If I were to liken the ships to automobiles, I'd say:
1. The TOS Connie is like a good solid long bed heavy duty pickup.
2. The TMP Connie is like a 60's muscle car.
3. The Abramsprise is like an Edsel. Or the unfortunate love child of a Porsche 911 and an Edsel. Because it does have aerodynamic sweeping lines, but there's a lot of flying brick here as well.
__________________
"One of the many, the proud, the friends of Zardoz".

Last edited by MonsieurHood : 11-28-2008 at 09:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-28-2008, 09:54 PM
jtrek79's Avatar
jtrek79 jtrek79 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Athens,Greece
Posts: 3,330
Default

i ll give u 2 reasons why the new E is better

Its sleeker , the other two are not
its faster , did u see the way it moves?
__________________
B E H O L D T H E N A R A D A
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-28-2008, 09:59 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Morning jtrek, how are you and how is the weather in Athens? I guess the milder than here in Germany where it is freezing cold.
Concerning the E, I think no matter whether one likes her or not based on the few shots, one cannot judge her until one saw all of her in the movie.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-28-2008, 10:04 PM
jtrek79's Avatar
jtrek79 jtrek79 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Athens,Greece
Posts: 3,330
Default

you re right , of course , i am just excited , the weather is cloudy , the cold finaly reached us , well its not as cold as in germany , i am looking frw to visit your country this summer with a friend
__________________
B E H O L D T H E N A R A D A
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-28-2008, 10:25 PM
MissionTrek08's Avatar
MissionTrek08 MissionTrek08 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,562
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by radoskal View Post
look here

Now between the three of em, I gotta say. The Original is fine and upstanding, the refit (my fave) is spectacular, and the New one...well, from the picture it does in fact look like nothing to write home about.

The engine Pylons look droopy, the saucer section out of place. Yet, at the same time when I see it zooming around in the trailer, It takes on a totally new life and somehow becomes much more identifiable as a constitution class starship. It's like the motion actually breathes a bit of sparkle and life into the otherwise, saggy model, leading me to believe that we should all take a deep breath, and wait to judge the ship when we can see it, to be blunt, on a really big screen, and for more than a few frames at a time.
Another fine post which underscores the importance of CONTEXT in any such judgments, a lesson some are still not accounting for in their commentary (though that's their right).

Like, love or hate the new ship design, NONE of us know its full context in the film -- yet we collectively have decades of experience with the TOS Enterprise, the Refit, TNG's E. We've seen them from all angles, in a battle, docked in orbit, circling planets and zipping into warp space.

But we've only seen splinters of the 'reality' of the Abrams' version. There is simply no logical way to effectively compare the three side-by-side (figuratively speaking) with the new ship being at such an information disadvantage. Seeing glimpses of it in motion on a big screen or even our monitors changed many opinions on this ship -- it didn't set them in stone, naturally, but contexts changed many perceptions considerably from that lone, cropped still photo.

Suppositions can be made and conclusions may be jumped to this early, but it's all based on incomplete data, including that all-important context of dramatics which abound for the other ships we know so well, like them better or not.
__________________

MISSION:TREK's in-depth review of STAR TREK


Proud member of the Friends of Zardoz Association. Avatar courtesy of Eliza's House of Avatars with three convenient locations near you. Free balloons for the kids!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.